FreeMarketDuck.com

Idaho's Weekly Journal of Local & National Commentary Week
2815

byFree Market
Duck

What the hell is a "job?"

(Nov 08, 2012)

There is no such animal as
"jobs." There are only individuals choosing how they want to work,
relate and exchange with others. What if all individuals became their
own "employer?" Would they have a "job?" How would you calculate
"unemployment" statistics?

The term "job" and
"unemployment" are simply fake economic constructs for today's Keynesian
economists who have adopted Marxist socialist economics and shoved
individuals into erroneous mathematical equations that bear no resemblance
to reality.

Washington, DC
-- What is a "job?"

All we hear today from politicians is that Americans need "jobs." If
you don't have a job, you are said to be "unemployed." We have
"unemployment" insurance. What is an "employer?" What is an
"employee?"

I submit that the study of economics has been so terribly distorted by the
old Marxist philosophy of "workers" vs. "managers" -- or the proletariat vs.
the bourgeoisie, or managers vs. the workers, or the company vs. the union
-- that we have lost total sight of what is really going on in the field of
study known as economics.

In reality, we have individuals living in a nation. Each individual
has the choice to either run his own business by himself or join with others
in a corporation or hire himself/herself out on an hourly/monthly/yearly
wage basis to perform work for somebody else or a corporation.

In today's political and economic terms, the concept of "employee" or "job"
is simply a somewhat erroneous construct for today's socialist (Keynesian)
economists to use in various mathematical equations. In the real
world, Americans do not have to have "jobs." They do not have to be
"employees." The fact that the majority do so -- i.e., work for
somebody else by exchanging labor as their product for a medium of exchange
(money) -- is more a reflection of people's choices than anything else.
It is not a mandatory universal law of science or anything.

Therefore, for politicians to claim that their political duty is to ensure
that everybody in America has a "job" is pure political nonsense.
People do not need the government to ensure that they have "jobs."
Americans need the government to get out of the "job" market and allow all
individuals to be free to voluntarily exchange goods and services in a free
market capitalist society.

The only true function of the government, and thus the politicians, is to
ensure that all individuals' inherent freedoms and rights to their own mind,
body, and property are not infringed upon. Unfortunately, it has now
been inculcated into our economic system that it is the function of the
federal, state, and local governments to do everything possible to "create
Jobs" for everybody in the nation. And that's when our problems begin.

Every politician has their own definition and moral philosophy of what
constitutes "ensuring that everybody gets a job," that everybody is
"employed," and if they are not "employed," then politicians have concocted
methods that they think will accomplish their "full employment" goal.
Thus we get politicians who conspire with central bankers to inflate the
crap out of our paper and digitized money in order to create "full
employment." We have government "unemployment insurance" with
essentially no time limits. We have food stamps for the "unemployed."
In fact "unemployment benefits" have now been stretched to include all types
of "welfare benefits." And so it goes on and on, the continual erosion
of individual rights and free market capitalism in order to implement the
old Marxist, state collectivist philosophy of the "proletariat" -- the
workers with a for-hire "job" -- vs. the bourgeoisie -- those who manage a
corporation and are not defined as having a "job" because they are managers.

It has gotten so bad, so ingrained in the minds of our culture, that
politicians now assume that it is an inherent "right" -- like freedom of
speech -- for everybody to "receive" a "job." Welcome to the Newspeak
of 2013 in which "rights to receive based upon relative needs" in economics
has replaced the concept of inherent individual rights to voluntarily
exchange in an open free market.

We have now established an economic caste system of relative neediness with
those who are determined (by whom?) to be the most neediest, forcing
(through government intervention) producers of goods and services to become
subservient to the "neediest non-workers" who don't have a "job." Nor
does it stop there. Those who have a "job," are automatically assumed
to be entitled to receive "benefits" from the presumed non-workers,
corporate management. Those "workers" who do not have a "job," are
assumed to be entitled to receive "benefits" such as "health care" from the
government.

But the government is us. So we now are presumed to have a "right" to
receive both a "job" and "benefits" such as "health insurance" from...
whom?... ourselves, which is the government?... from The Producers?...
We have now reached the level of total economic absurdity by defining
ourselves as having a "right to receive" from ourselves and our neighbors by
eliminating our inherent rights to our own minds and bodies -- which now
belong to that great fictitious entity called the government. We are
now living in a vicious circle of incomprehensible illogic and unreason and,
in fact, we have tried to implement this absurdity as if it represented
objective reality. We have lost our minds, our basic foundational
premises, and thus our individual liberties, culture, and all that goes
along with it.

We have instead adopted a suicidal philosophy of Marxist economics:
"workers vs. corporate managers," "jobs," and "unemployment." With the
government acting as "full employment" broker. Until we get back on
track, expect to see more and more nonsensical crap flowing from both
Democrats and Republicans in our nation about "creating jobs" and
"employment."

There is no such animal as "jobs." There are only individuals choosing
how they want to work, relate and exchange with others in a free and open
market. What if all individuals became their own "employer?"
Would they have a "job?" "Self-employment" is an oxymoronic term
useful only for the tax collector. What, in real terms, would
you "self-employ" yourself to do? Obviously, it is to
exchange with others. How do you
fit into the Marxist bourgeoisie vs. proletariat construct of "worker" vs.
"management?" You don't and neither does anybody else. Hiring
out your labor is not different than offering to exchange any other product
or service in the market. If you were "self-employed," would you beat
yourself to death and pay your ass low wages? How would you calculate
"unemployment" statistics if everybody was "self-employed" and thus nobody
would fall into the classic Marxist definition of a "worker?" Marxist
economics, today's Keynesian economics, breaks down under simple logical
scrutiny.

The terms "job" and "unemployment" are simply fake
economic constructs for today's Keynesian economists who have adopted
Marxist socialist economics and shoved individuals into erroneous
mathematical equations that bear no resemblance to reality.

This entire 2012 election cycle and campaigns by both Republicans and
Democrats screaming about the necessity of the President and Congress to
create "jobs, jobs, jobs" is just a smoke screen for altruistic state
collectivism. It's called The Santa Claus Syndrome -- "free" gifts
from the government while stripping you of your individual rights. And
those who believe that politicians can create "jobs" and manage an economy
also probably believe in The Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy, too. In the
Middle East, they don't believe in the Easter Bunny. Oh no, that would
be absurd. They believe they get to shag 72 virgins in heaven if they
knock themselves off by blowing up the Brooklyn Bridge. By the way,
does that count as a "job?" – FM Duck